Incidência de eventos de manutenção relacionados à matriz de retenção em overdentures mandibulares retidas por um ou dois implantes e diferentes sistemas de retenção

• Ano de defesa: 2021
• Autor(a) principal: Melo, Patrick Borges de
• Orientador(a): Leles, Cláudio Rodrigues
• Banca de defesa: Leles, Cláudio Rodrigues, Cruvinel, Diogo Rodrigues, Hartmann, Roberto
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Goiás
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-graduação em Odontologia (FO)
• Departamento: Faculdade de Odontologia - FO (RG)
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Encaixe de precisão de dentadura; Implante dentário; Implante de prótese mandibular; Overdentures
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Denture precision attachment; Dental implant; Mandibular prosthesis implantation; Overdentures
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::ODONTOLOGIA
• Link de acesso: http://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/handle/tede/11519

To assess the incidence of maintenance events related to retention matrices of totally edentulous individuals rehabilitated with mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants, with Neodent branded spherical abutment and nylon matrix retention system (groups N1 – 1 implant and N2 – 2 implants) or Straumann branded spherical abutment and metalIC matrix (groups S1 – 1 implant and S2 – 2 implants). Materials and methods: This was a prospective cohort study and included 70 patients (N1=11; N2=13; S1=22; S2=24) who participated in two randomized clinical trials, previously performed at the Center for Research in Prosthodontics and Implant at the Federal University of Goiás (UFG), followed for a mean period of 28.7 months (SD=9.8; 12.0-47.2). Cumulative incidences, incidence densities and time-event estimation using Kaplan-Meier analysis were calculated.Results: The mean number of matrix-related events per participant was 1.33 (SD=1.25, 0-6), with a significantly higher incidence of matrix replacement (p<0.001) in nylon matrix overdenture wearers. The classification of the type of visit (scheduled or non-scheduled) was similar in participants with 1 or 2 implants (p=0.267). Visits to replace the retention matrix occurred during unscheduled appointments in 63.6% of the total events, and 36.4% during scheduled appointments (p=0.015). There was no statistically significant difference in retention matrix events (replacements and activations) between participants with overdenture retained by 1 or 2 implants (p=0.864). Time to occurrence of matrix exchange was similar among participants treated with overdenture retained by 1 or 2 implants (p=0.924). There was no significant difference in the total number of matrix events in relation to the number of implants during the follow-up period (p=0.710). The retention system with metallic matrix (groups S1 and S2) showed superior performance compared to the nylon matrix (groups N1 and N2), with a statistically significant difference (p=0.009). Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of maintenance events related to the matrix between the groups. There was a significantly higher number of events in the nylon matrix group, regardless of the number of implants used to retain the mandibular overdenture.